Letters to the Editor

Letters from Readers

March 7, 2019

I tend to agree with Larry Ginter that one must vote for the person, not the party (Feb. 2 Farm News letters). But he proves himself to be the authoritarian in calling for universal healthcare. How does he intend for us to pay for it without an authoritarian government; bake sales? And keep in mind that competition is the only way to lower cost without sacrificing quality.

On abortion, The Founders had a simple solution; a limited federal government. Murder is not mentioned anywhere in the Constitution. That is left to the states. If the states were free to determine how murder applies to abortion, those of us who wish to live in a state that respects all life could live there. For those people who see a child in the womb as a tumor or appendix or just an inconvenience, another state might suit them. As the people form policies in their respective states, relationships between their citizens will reflect those attitudes.

Roe v. Wade ended this competition between states, so now we end up with arguments about women's rights and whether a baby is a baby.

Personally, I would pick the pro-life state because I believe respect for one life bleeds over into a society in general. If there is any reason to have a government at all, it is to protect the most innocent and defenseless. This purpose of government has devolved into a provider for fools hooked on immediate gratification. It has eliminated the need to save, plan, and carry our own weight. It has justified theft.

When the money runs out and the store shelves are empty for lack of a reward for ambition and hard work, we can look back at these insane policies of legalized murder and plunder as the beginning of the end.